Lordevo Shop (x402 website checks)

Email authentication check (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) ($0.002/call)

email_auth

Read-onlyIdempotent

$0.002 per call (x402, USDC on Base; free trial: add "trial": true or use try_free). [Web and domain checks] SPF, DKIM and DMARC check. Check a domain's email authentication and spoofing risk from public DNS: MX and mail provider, SPF (record, all-qualifier, DNS lookup count vs the 10 limit), DMARC policy/pct/rua, DKIM at 30 common selectors, MTA-STS, TLS-RPT, BIMI. Returns grade, spoofable flag and fixes. ~1-3 s.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "email_auth"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`trial`	No	Optional. true = free if a trial call is left (3 per IP per UTC day), else the payment terms.
`domain`	Yes	Domain that sends the email, e.g. example.com (a URL or an address like jane@example.com also works)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mx`	No
`spf`	No
`dkim`	No
`tool`	No
`cache`	No
`dmarc`	No
`grade`	No
`score`	No
`_trial`	No	Present when the call was a free trial call.
`domain`	No
`issues`	No
`provider`	No
`price_usd`	No
`spoofable`	No
`mail_provider`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 5, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / trial / description

Previous value: -"Optional. true = answer free if a trial call is left (3 per IP per UTC day); otherwise you get the payment terms."New value: +"Optional. true = free if a trial call is left (3 per IP per UTC day), else the payment terms."

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / domain / description

Previous value: -"Domain name, e.g. example.com (a URL or email address also works)"New value: +"Domain that sends the email, e.g. example.com (a URL or an address like jane@example.com also works)"

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / trial

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. true = answer free if a trial call is left (3 per IP per UTC day); otherwise you get the payment terms.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "required": [
+        "tool",
+        "domain"
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "properties": {
+        "accepts": {
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "error": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "resource": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "x402Version": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "x402Version",
+        "accepts"
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "properties": {
+        "charged": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "error": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "error"
+      ]
+    }
+  ],
+  "properties": {
+    "_trial": {
+      "description": "Present when the call was a free trial call.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "cache": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "dkim": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "dmarc": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "grade": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "issues": {
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "mail_provider": {
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "mx": {
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "price_usd": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "provider": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "spf": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "spoofable": {
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them: data source is public DNS only (no mailbox probing), latency is ~1-3 s, cost is $0.002 per call with a per-IP daily free-trial path, and output includes grade, spoofable flag and fixes. It could still note whether results are cached or what happens when a domain has no records.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is dense but well front-loaded: pricing and the free-trial escape hatch come first, then scope, then the enumeration of checks, then the return shape and latency. Nearly every clause carries information. The bracketed '[Web and domain checks]' tag and the second mention of trial (already in the schema) are slight redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present there is no need to spell out return values, and annotations cover safety, so the description's job is mostly scope, cost and data source — all of which it delivers. It is complete enough to call correctly. Only the sibling-boundary guidance is missing, which is a usage gap rather than a completeness failure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (domain with URL/address tolerance, trial with quota semantics) are already documented in the schema and the description does not need to repeat them. The extra detail it offers — 30 DKIM selectors, the 10-lookup SPF limit — describes internal behavior rather than adding meaning to the inputs. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the exact resource and verb ('Check a domain's email authentication and spoofing risk from public DNS') and enumerates the concrete checks performed (MX, SPF all-qualifier and lookup count, DMARC pct/rua, DKIM selectors, MTA-STS, TLS-RPT, BIMI). That is far more specific than a title restatement. It stops short of naming its nearest siblings (email_validate, dns_lookup, domain_intel), so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the scope ('a domain's email authentication') rather than stated: there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, and no routing to email_validate for mailbox-level checks or dns_lookup for raw records. The only explicit alternative mentioned is the billing path (trial: true or try_free), which is cost guidance, not selection guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Lordevo Shop (x402 website checks) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?